Discussion in 'Reviews' started by W1zzard, Mar 22, 2011.
but I likes pictures. lol
I'll be oc'ing only CPU!
How embarrassing... and thats really all I have to say about this fai... erm... card.
I would still suggest something closer to 1000W. My personal favorites are Corsair or Enermax. Feel free to make a new thread, though.
nah.... that's it!
soo rumors about a revision ??
No it came from one of the 8 pin power plugs on the card. if it was the Mobo the cpu fan and memory all that area would be like Wizz`s 590 up in smoke.
The video linked from the Swedish overclocking site also suggests that the resistor blew, which sits right next to the 8-pin plugs. W1zz took it one step further and blew out a mosfet as well, though.
Wizz's PSU before testing GTX 590
Wizz's PSU after testing GTX 590
No it isn't. I get your point though, and I still don't see it as that bad.
What happaned to Nvidia could happen to anyone, This doesn't make GTX 590 a bad card, or a failure for the company. Besides GTX 590 was produced & will be shipped in limited quantities.
Intel had faulty P67 chipset so what?
And i admit that ATi is a winner here. But i'am still getting the card! cus i support them.
And both company's are great.
Wizz could the problem be a bad batch of mosfet`s and resistors ? Like they had to use old stock from somewhere ? If that is the case would ASUS and Nvidia wait until Japan is back up and running ...minus the extra radiation power ? Very interesting card to say the least ,It performs to what i was expecting but was also expecting it to overclock better.
@W1zz ... Why on the Power Consumption page does the text for idle still say "Windows Vista Aero sitting at desktop" ?
Should be 7, no?
The problem is that they are inconsistant even if we assume the reasoning is true.
Again, I'll use the Crysis Warhead benchmark.
For the GTX580 SLi, they raised the shaders to Enthusiast. But for the HD6990 they left the shaders at Gamer and instead raised the AA. If GTX580 SLI can run with enthusiast shaders, and get 30FPS which they consider "playable" then the HD6990 should have been able to do the same, considering they raised AA with that card and it still have 35FPS. Why didn't they increase the shaders instead of AA?
1.2v is taking he pee abit aint it?
Thats in horrible taste but damn its funny!
nice review;i suspect nvidia clocked the cards to this "stock" speed just to avoid the kind of damage occurred during oc.
But there was no damage when overclocked, it occured when changing voltage.
wow .. you're the first to notice this since i changed my test system to windows 7 .. fixed! thanks
i dont consider it an unrealistic setting, people are going to tweak this, and with power capping technology they (and i) think "i'll be safe anyway"
lol and why u change voltage if not for oc?
hahahhaha i loled so hard when i read *boom*
Seems like it is slower than 2x570 SLI and probably 2x560 SOC SLI but costs more.
No point in 6990 and 590 cards unless you plan to run two of them for quad SLI.
guys out of the the million nvidia is making. just because this one card blew up on wizz doesnt mean every other card will. Ill take the 590 over the 6990 in the sacrafice of the 2-3% for the cooler running card, a little bit more efficient, and quieter card.
The 6990 is the more efficient and cooler card, its fan however makes it noisier.
Because increasing the shaders would have caused a larger performance hit than raising AA(as i understand they have diff architectures amd/nvidia, so what affects one, may not affect the other.).
imho('cause i didn`t do the tests)
Separate names with a comma.